Discussion: Gps watches

Does any one know where i could get one

prosportwatches.com. good prices and quick response. Discounted price is shown once you add the watch to cart!!

Thanks

do u know what the difference is betwween the garmin 205,305,405

pretty sure 205 doesnt come with a heart rate monitor. and i think the 405 is a smaller, newer (dearer) version of the 305 pretty much. im intending/wanting to get a 405 glen. i reckon they look good.

Here's a side-by-side comparison of the 205/305/405 features.

The 205 and 305 are virtually the same, except that the 305 comes with a heart rate monitor and has the capacity to use optional accessories (foot pod and bike cadence sensor).

The 405 is a smaller version of the 205/305, and is compatible with HRM, foot pod, and bike cadence sensor. The can buy the 405 with the HRM included, or without. Though, if you choose to buy without, you can still buy an HRM later and have it work.

I just picked up a 405 on Friday, and I used it on Saturday at an 0-meet. Garmin has an online website where you can share your results. For example, here's mine from Saturday. The website has limited features at the moment, but I'm told that a lot more functionality will be added by the end of the month. I'm one of the earliest adopters of the 405, so I have to be patient for things like this...

The wireless technology in the 405 is pretty slick. The other notable feature, the touch-sensitive bezel (a la iPod scroll wheel) is either really ingenious, or really frustrating. The bezel can be locked, so that's good. I suppose that I'll get use to it, too. I remember I had a hard time with my iPod scroll wheel when I first bought it.

The best prices that I know of are at REI.

One potentially important difference between the 205/305 and the 405 is that the 405 doesn't have a map screen. The map screen shows your track so you can see where you are in relation to where you have been. This is helpful if you are training in an area that you aren't familiar with. (You can run anywhere and not worry about getting lost.)

The 405 can still display your distance and it does record your route so you can view it on your computer later. The 405 is also smaller and looks more like a sports watch. It has other advantages too, but the lack of a map screen is a bit disappointing.

Yes, to confirm, there isn't a map screen. However, you can still save and navigate to locations, and there is a "Back to Start" feature where the compass screen comes up and directs you back to the start.

Do you need to lock the bezel control on 405 when running through the forest so that it doesn't get knocked and accidentally switch things on/off?

I was worried aout that feature as I have on odd occasions even had my button on a reguar split watch bumped by branches thus stopping my watch so I figured a berazel would be a huge target.

In my experience yesterday, I needed to lock the bezel. I meant to lock the bezel before I started, but I forgot. If the bezel is locked, you still have access to the start/stop and lap/reset buttons, so it's not like you're locked out of necessary features while the bezel is locked.

Five minutes into my run yesterday, I wanted to look down at my elapsed time, and instead I saw my virtual training partner... a little stick figure man. I wasted a few seconds getting back to the screen I wanted, and then locked the bezel. It was fine for the rest of the course.

The bezel is wonderful for pre- and post-run setting and analysis. But when you're in training mode, you might as well lock it, as the two buttons give you everything you'll need.

so on which is better the verdict is ....................

Wait for the 705.

Upload your course before you start. A voice then tells you where to go and where to stop. No need to carry a map anymore.

isnt that cheating

and how long will it be

tiil it comes out

glen. pretty sure he was being sarcastic :P
bahhahahahhahahahahhahahahaha

If you don't need the map screen, then the 405 is probably the better watch because it's smaller and newer, etc. Otherwise, the 305 might be the better watch. I have the 205 and I really like it. From my personal experience, both the 205 and 305 seem to be good, solid devices.

Perhaps someone who has both the 205/305 and the 405 could give additional information.

I've been reading a lot of the forums about the 405 (the best one is here), and they compare the 205/305 and the 405. The items most talked about are:

- The 205/305 has a larger screen, which can show 4 data fields. The 405 has a smaller screen and can only show 3.

- The 205/305 has the map screen, the 405 does not.

- The 205/305 has a multi-sport function (run/bike), the 405 sort of has this, but it's buried within a bunch of menus.

- The 405 picks up satellites much quicker.

- The 405 has the wireless transfer, a touch bezel, and is much smaller, so you can wear it as a watch.

- Currently at REI, the 205 is $125 (sale) and the 305 is $165 (sale). The 405 is $300 (without HRM) and $350 (with HRM).

Thanks all exept josh

Are there any comments about the "sampling" frequency used by the watch? I'm pretty sure the 305 offers 1 second intervals but the 405 only offers 4 seconds as the highest frequency. I guess it's good enough for the slow runs in the forest. But if you run sprints in urban environment, does it cut corners and such due to bad sampling frequency? Can you do the fine analysis of how long a hesitation takes before you find the control directly and such things? Haven't tested the watch myself but I'm definitely thinking of buying one.

I use 1 or 2 sec interval. 3 sec or more is too long if you like to get useful data - see your stops, time used for making route choise decissions after each control etc.

Are you sure there is no 1 sec option in 405?

I just read that in the instructions manual for the 405, but since I don't own the watch I would like to get this confirmed or rather have the myth busted ;)

I could have sworn that read somewhere about "smart sampling" or something like that, but I just went through both manuals and I only thing I found was "approximately 20 hours of data (assuming 1 trackpoint is being recorded every 4 seconds)".

Maybe I read something on a forum somewhere about the smart sampling rate, or maybe I'm getting it confused with something I read about the 205/305.

That being said, I've used the 405 three times while driving to and from work (averaging 1 min/km). I haven't noticed anything abnormal with the tracklog lopping off corners, however, most of the corners are gentle. When I get home today, I'll test it out by driving around the neighboorhood and making lots of turns to see what happens.

One other thing would be to export the logged data into gpx-format and then looking at the data in an texteditor/xmleditor and check how far apart the timestamps in the trkpt tag is.

One thing not yet discussed was the elevation tracking. In 'Kupackman's example it mentioned 1000m elevation gain/loss. This sounds like a lot. Is it reliable (as it is not barometric, but probably gps-based)? And if not, would there be a way to export the coordinates/track for example to gmap-pedometer.com, where the altitude feature works quite reliable? Thanks in advance for any ideas.

I can address these issues...

First, the elevation data is GPS-based, not barometric.

Second, the example I linked above is through the Garmin Connect website, and it has been noted on several of the 405 discussion boards that the output from the elevation algorithm on the website is off, not the actual elevation data itself. For comparison, the elevation data in Garmin Training Center (the software on your local machine) is more accurate. However, I can't prove this, as I accidentally deleted my run from my watch, and I can't seem to download the raw data from the website....

Garmin is aware of this issue in the Garmin Connect software, and it'll be fixed in an upcoming fix. The Garmin Connect website is still in its infancy, so I'm seeing a lot of growing pains with it. There's supposed to be a big update on May 21st, when the website will be available to 205/305 users.

Third, I think you can only export .gpx tracks from the gmap-pedometer website to a GPS unit, not the other way around.

Glen, make sure you get one from the US, even with the freight they are waaaaaaaaaaay cheaper than retail prices here. Try ebay.

My main beef with the 305 (and I guess 205) is the amount of time it takes to pick up satellites. But once it gets a lock it doesnt let go easily which is the upside I guess. If the 405 picks them up quicker I would go for that one.

My experience with gps elevation data is that is not accurate enough to do any serious evaluation of the climb over a course. At least not if you run in the forest where the gps reception is not 100%.

Wow u guys know so much thanks again

It's wirtten in the manual, it records 1 point about every 4 seconds. I guess it's same as smart recording in 205/305. You can't get much out of it, so I wouldn't buy it untill there is firmware update for better resolution.

Ok, I checked the tracklogs with time stamps...

The 405 does a "smart sampling" rate.

For example, when I drove home from work the other day, it recorded 909 data points in 1230 seconds, which is a point every 1.35 seconds (at an average pace of 1 min/km).

When I recorded 90 seconds of my softball game, it recored 20 data points in 87 seconds, which is a point every 4.35 seconds. The softball data is interesting, because I was either standing (at home plate and first base) or sprinting (from home to first, from first to second). When standing, the time between samples was sometimes 6-7 seconds, but when I was running, it was every 1-2 seconds.

If the 405 picks them up quicker I would go for that one.
I don't have a 205/305, but reading the forums tells me that the 405 picks them up significantly faster. In my experience, it's been very speedy, but I don't have anything to compare it to.

Thanks for all the info.
Some internet research leads me to believe that a HR watch with GPS tracking and mapping, barometric elevation measurement, and with at least 12hrs battery time, does not exist for now. This would be exactly what I need. All else are compromises. Suunto and Polar miss the mapping features, they only calculate distances and speed.
So if anybody knows a gadget doing all the stuff mentioned above, please let me know.
And yes: Prices for Garmin 405 in Europe vs. US show that we Europeans are getting ripped off big time (for no obvious reason...).

Phil, have a look at Suunto Watches. Their GPS watches are more expensive, but they offer barometric altimeters. I don't know how long their batteries last.

BTW, one possible explanation for why the Garmin 405 costs more in Europe could be that the European version must meet RoHS specifications. But I'm not sure how much this adds to the price.

kupackman << That sounds really good! That means that it would use more trkpt when there is alot of changes in the recorded data less when there is little change to the direction or speed. Thank you for testing the watch out for us maybe buyers!
This one is going on my buy list for my US vacation in August :)

Arlaharen, note that does not work so well for orienteering. Example case - you approach a control and you are a little bit unsure where you are and have to stop three times to read map for 2 sec but you manage go straight to control. If you use fixed 1 sec interval you can easily and directly see how many times and how many seconds you were standing still and how fast you ran between those stops. With smart recording you can't know did you make any map reading stops, how many times and how long they took, it may look like you were just moving a bit slow there. "Smart" recording recors how you move, not how you stand still. And in orienteering that not moving information is at least as important. For example, when you stand still to make route decission at control, you get 6 sec interval of points - not so useful or easily usable data for analysing your performance and habbits at control site.

Simple one sec dot plot looks like this:
http://routegadget.awardspace.com/siljarastit07/Cl...
You don't need to be a scientist to analyse that, see how meny seconds is used for something. You can't do this with 405.

---
phil, take a look at FRWD W series.

Jagge << I'm not sure that's the case. If the watch optimizes the trkpt recording so that it only registers when there is change in direction or speed then you don't loose any information. Sure if you plot each trktpt as a single dot it may look like there were only 1 sec in between and you didn't make any mistake. But if your analysis program "adds" the extra points in between you don't loose any information and you can easily see the "stops" in the visualization of the trk or the program can just as easily colorcode the track depending on the speed and ju will see the stops clearly as well. This is of course only valid if the "smart" recording works as I wrote.

I would really like to see some recorded tracks from the 405 especially on a sprint course with lots of quick starts and stops and also directionl changes. If there is someone who is willing to share some recorded data feel free to email me. :)

Well, I just assumed it's the same "smart recording" as in 205/305, I have never got much details out of those. 405 may have better algorithm, but I doubt it.

I have tried to do those speed color coded route maps, but I always seem to fail miserably. I get the map alright and route with some wild colors, but I never get any useful information out of it. I already knew I ran downhills faster than uphills ;) Any hints how it should be done?

I'll attempt a "sprint" training exercise on Sunday. I'll just run around the local park at various speeds, lots of starts, stops, and direction changes. I'll note when I slowed down and hesitated, and see if the data from the 405 confirms or not.

Jagg << I think this colorcoding works quite ok for analyzing:
http://www.matstroeng.se/maps/show_map.php?id=1

I haven't used it myself but this is Mats Troengs race from earlier this spring. The red color indicates a slower pace and green a faster pace.

kupackman << Great, I eagerly awaits your results!

If you're writing your own software, I would think that a useful thing would be a marker to show when you haven't traveled more than a short distance within a particular amount of time, e.g. if within 6 seconds you haven't traveled at least 5 m (those numbers may be way off, but you get the idea).

Thats about what I usually get when try to do it. I can't see how many seconds Mats used for punching, did he stop at a control to make route choice decission and how many seconds was used for it. Did he stop or slow down at some place and how many seconds was lost / used here and there. A simple 1 sec dot plot would tell it all, here I can see nothing. Something like JJ suggested might help a bit, but I don't think there is such software yet.

I'm looking for a program that will not only overlay the track on a map or .jpg, but will also highlight or mark the track at the top of every minute (or more generally, one particular second of every minute).

Even more generally, mark a specific interval of time (x hours, y minutes, z seconds) or place a mark at specific distance intervals along the track (such as every 100m or 1km or 10km).

Know anything that will do that?

SportTracks can do that, if I got that need right.

Jan has done similar experiments too with his own tools:
http://news.worldofo.com/2007/09/24/routechoice-wi...

I'm geting adept enough with KML files that I could write code to do that at some point. This only gievs you tracks in Google Earth, but Cristina assures me that you can overlay an O-map into Google Earth. My priority for my KML converter is for hang gliding, though, so no promises on when I could get to adding features like this (I already have a backlog of things I want to add, and not enough time to work on it).

Here is example image of 1 sec and smart recording including color coded image made with quickroute:
http://www.routegadget.net/gps/gpsanalysis.gif

That is from the O training I did today, I ran with two gps units, one with 1 sec recording (Globalsat) and one with "smart" (Forerunner 205). In 2 sec plot you can see well how I stopped twice before the control and you can easily count how many second was lost there. In smart mode it recorded the first stop but missed totally the second one (you can't see timestamps, but I can tell interpolating points will not help).

I also put there snapshots of color coded routes, as you can see it all wrong in both cases. Fast yellow color in places I stopped and slow color in places I moved. That is what I usually get when I try to do it, it's clearly all wrong.

So, I am afraid the smart recording is all you will get out of 405 and current color coding tools will not help much. But there may be new firmware and better color coding tools in the future.

It looks like that second "stop" was pretty subtle, maybe 3 seconds that you weren't moving at normal speed. I think it's a lot to ask for GPS tools to detect that.

Jagge << If the smart recording of the 405 is like that of the 205 I'm not impressed. That is not good enough for any serious analysis of a orienteering race.

About the colorcoding:
It looks like your program calculates speed according to the past history and not by the current speed? Have you tried making use of the speed reading or by calculating the speed by the "next" trkpt instead of by the "previous"? I think Quickroutes colorcoding looks quite ok and looks very useable. I agree that the 1 sec dots is also a very clear marker for speed. I guess a program where you could swithc between the 2 modes would be the best.

Arlaharen, I see it same way too, and that's why I felt i should warn people about this issue. It's not nice to hear afterwards you would do far better with a cheap 60 euros device.

If it gets 1 sec recording one day with firmware update there will still be this memory issue, it's capable to hold only about 5 hours of data. So you will need to have a laptop to download data to on your O camps and O weeks. I had to use "smart" in Italy last summer because I didn't travel with laptop. So I lost all details, and details are all I am interested in - I don't need gps to know where I went.

The color coding was made with Quickroute and I am not aware of how it calculates speed. But I guess it uses something like previous 10 seconds. It looks ok & useful as you said, but if you compare it with the original data it doesn't look so useful any more.

It would be excellent tool if this speed calculation issue gets fixed somehow and if it would show the actual points when zoomed in close enough. Not a big thing to fix I guess, I am sure Mats will do something like that in near future, it's just first version of a brand new tool after all. Or Thomas G will come up with something. It's good to see these tools coming, I hope they find time & motivation to continue the great work.

So the 305 would be better then the 405 as it is cheaper and has consistant data input

We still don't know if the 405's data recording is exactly like Smart Recording on the 205/305.

I ran a sprint event on Saturday with my 205 in Smart Recording mode. My time was 30:25 and my watch recorded 439 track points. That is an average of about one track point every 4.16 seconds. My track shows where I went, but the fine detail is missing.

kupackman's second most recent post suggests that the 405 takes more track points. If this is true, then the 405 may be adequate for seeing where you hesitated, etc.

Anyway, if price is an issue and size isn't, I would recommend getting the 305. It is a good, solid device that has been around long enough for most of the hardware and software issues to be worked out.

so on the 305 do u chose how often you want a track point

Yes. You can choose between Every Second and Smart Recording mode.

In Every Second mode, the watch has enough memory to store about 3.5 hours of data. After that, the oldest tracks are overwritten. So if you go on a trip with many races, you may have to bring a computer to download your data regularly.

The owner's manual for the 405 says it can hold approximately 20 hours of data, assuming that 1 track point is recorded every 4 seconds. This would correspond to 5 hours of data if the watch could record a track point every second.

okay no real difference in data it can hold

im gunna get a 305 cuz its cheaper and it can do all i want it can do

if you wear it on your left arm consistently you could end up like Nadal

speaking about the 405 : any idea if it's compatible with a polar hr belt ?

RE: Polar HR Belt

The 405 uses the ANT+ technology, so unless your Polar uses ANT+ (it probably doesn't), then you're out of luck. When I was at REI, I asked them pretty much the same question about my New Balance HR belt.

The 405 is compatible with the HR belts from the 305, though, since they use ANT+.

Garmin FR 205/305 HR belts are NOT compatible with 405. See Garmin web site.

Where on the Garmin website does it say that?

I found this from the Garmin blog from January 3rd:

The 405 is compatible with the heart rate monitor strap from the 305. You simply "pair" the HR strap with the 405 (it's a simple menu operation to complete the pairing step). That's the beauty of ANT+Sport technology -- interconnectivity with multiple compatible devices.

This topic is also covered on February 15th.

If you have a device with ANT+Sport technology, it can talk with another ANT+Sport device. For example, if you own a Garmin Forerunner 305 (which comes with a heart rate monitor that uses ANT+Sport) and you want to upgrade to the 405 when it's available, you can purchase the model that comes without heart rate and simply use the heart rate monitor you already own.

I also asked the REI sales clerk specifically if the 305 HR strap was compatible with the 405, and he said yes.

Actually I was looking what kind (model) of Heart Rate Monitor & Strap FR405 is using (Part Number: 010-10997-00) and then what products are compatible. This is were I didn't see compatibility with 205/305. Similar, I went to FR 305 and navigated from here to Heart Rate Monitor & Strap (Part Number: 010-10645-00) and then what products compatible with it. Same result. Didn't see any cross-references.

And I don't trust any clerks, even at REI.

So, bring your FR305 HRM into the store and try to sync with FR405.

I'll still positive that the 305 HR strap will work with the 405.

Here's another discussion from the official Garmin blog about ANT+ compatible devices and accessories.

Q (from user): It says that the footpod accessory for the 405 is: 010-10998-00, I got a 305 footpod for Christmas, its number is 010-10818-00.

Are these products the same? Will they both work with the 405 when I get one? Please let me know, I have to take it back to the store if it is not compatible.

A (from Garmin): Thanks for the comment regarding foot pod compatibility. Good news--the foot pod you received for Christmas is compatible with the 405. That's because both foot pod models are ANT+Sport enabled, which means they can "pair" with other compatible devices. See the Peg's Post dated Feb. 15 for more on this topic.

I guess we'll know for sure on Saturday when there'll be a 405 and 305 in the same car...

Confirmed: a 305 HR strap will sync with a 405. I tried it myself on Saturday.

Yeah Glen! Go for a big, but light, and cheaper 305! It's good and very fun to use in the forrest and on the bike etc!!
Example pics from my blog:
http://homepage.hik.se/student/kt22bs/img/quickrou...
http://homepage.hik.se/student/kt22bs/img/karlskyn...
And download Quickroute here!

I have taken a look at some tracks made by the 405 and it seems that it saves track points a little bit more often than what the 305 did. The track seems to register the small twists and turns that the runner makes. But to really see the difference one should make a test run with both the 405 and two 305s on the wrist and set the 405 and one of the 305s to smart recoring and one 305 to 1s interval recording to really study the results ;)

For me I think I will go for a 405 later this summer.

For those still wondering about the 405 and sampling rate...

I ran in some sprint-o races on Wednesday, and the 405 averaged a trackpoint every 2.5 seconds with me running at about a 6 min/km orienteering pace. Looking at the route, it does a reasonable job of tracking, but it shows that I ran through the outside corners of buildings and fences and stuff.
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/105347
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/105348
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/105349

I also emailed Garmin support, asking them about the possibility of adding 1-second sampling in the future.

Garmin's response:

I'd be happy to help you. We asked the engineers if they planned on making the sampling rate one per second on the FR 405 and their reply was they did not have plans at this time. However, they requested more information and we gave them your information. The Engineering team will have to determine if this is something that they want to change. If they decide to make those changes it will be done with a software update at some point and time.

Basically, the more people ask about it, the better chance that we'll see it in a future update.

Costco online is now selling the Garmin Forerunner 305 for $180 shipping and handling included.

There is new version of QuickRoute available. All those colouring issues I described http://www.routegadget.net/gps/gpsanalysis.gif are fixed. Highly recommended. Couldn't get those dot yet with it though (and move/scale/rotate algorithm would work much bettter than affine it is always using).

I also got finally time to try OGPS http://www.orienteering.mb.ca/OGPS
I could saw dots and details nicely, color track by speed, even animate with it. But I can't edit (I think) route with it and the transfomation isn't enoug to get route right if either route or map are not perfect. But I guess one could live with it, I can highly recommend trying this tool too.

Anyway, I still think you need fixed interval to get best out of these tools.